Concordia TheoBLOGical Seminary

This blog is not generally political. But since we did publish a post by Rev. Robert Smith called, “Why I’m Troubled That Mitt Romney is a Mormon,” I figured it was fitting to publish this one as well. Originally submitted as a comment on Smith’s earlier post, I asked for and received the author’s permission to present his submission here.
- Stiegemeyer

First I would like to state that I am a LCMS Christian, second I would like to state that I am a Republican.

Having said that, I also had several concerns when I learned that Gov. Romney was a Mormon. Obviously I don’t like the idea for a few reasons. I think that their theology is severely defective and a little crazy, having absolutely no archeological evidence to back it up. I also would not like the new found recognition that the Mormon church would recieve if the most powerful nation in the world would have a Mormon president. I also knew enough about the Mormon faith to have concerns that a Mormon president may allow Salt Lake City to influence his decisions. But the more I read and thought about the issue I realized that if Romney is the best qualified and best represents my views (which I believe he is) I will have no problem voting for a Mormon.

For starters, there is much about the Mormon faith that conflicts with Christianity. To believe some of their theology about the Americas and Jesus, with giant walled cities in the Midwest and that Christ will return in Missouri and that Joseph Smith was a prophet seems absolutely absord. But we are not voting for the president of the LCMS. Catholics will not be voting for a pope. We’re not electing a patriach of Antioch. America is voting for a president and it states directly in the constituion that no religious belief will disqualify an individual from the presidency. I think if we refuse to vote for someone merely on the basis of disagreeing with their religious beliefs, that established a dangerous precedent for the future. The liberals would be all over the Religous Right of the Republican party for their hypocrisy. What would happen if a Lutheran would run in the future after the GOP just shot down their best candidate over his religion? We would be open to all sorts of attacks by the mainstream media.

Futher more, if we are to discount Romney because we believe his religion is “unbelievable” perhaps we should look to our own faith. It is “unbelievable” in its own sense. Imagine the media asking a Christian candidate to explain his faith in logistics…..
“Rev. Smith, do you really believe that wine and cheap bread you eat is really BOTH the body and blood of Christ, AND ALSO the bread and wine STILL?”
“President Bush, do you really believe that a 1st century Jewish carpenter rose from the dead after being crucified and decending into hell?”
“How is it possible to be born of a virgin?”
“Explain the theology of the Trinity in terms that the average person can understand.”

Do you see? Every religious faith seems a little nutty to the liberal that does not believe in religion, the deity or the supernatural. Even our founding fathers were not all devout Christians as mentioned before. James Madison considered himself atheist. Thomas Jefferson was a lifelong deist. Even Abraham Lincoln was not affiliated with any church and many historians now believe that he was not a religious person by any means. All three were perhaps the greatest presidents our country has known. If we are to disqualify someone for his religious beliefs we do not agree with, we are setting ourselves up for an unsteady future.

As for the greater recognition that Mormonism would recieve, there is not much we can do about that. I shutter to think that Mormonism would be exposed to a greater populous and that more people would be lead astray by a false theology. Yet, after some more research, I doubt that a Romney presidency would have that effect. Mormonism is a very strict religion. They do not drink alcohol, smoke, or even drink coffeeor caffeine. I’m sure some people would see a Mormon missionary and say “Oh, I voted for Romney, come in. I’ll listen for a minute.” Where normally they would have slammed the door.
But would those people really also say, “Oh yes. Mormonism sounds fantastic! All those walled cities, golden tablets and the Angel Moroni makes so much sense. Let me throw away all that beer and coke in the fridge right now! I can’t wait to go without my morning Starbucks for the rest of my life!”
I doubt it. Mormonism is again, a strict religion and most if not all people would not be willing to give up their lifestyles to follow a loony religion. If they do, perhaps they ought to have checked the strength of their own faith anyway.

As for the Consul of Salt Lake influencing Romney’s decisions as president, I also considered this an impossiblity after some research. Mitt was governor of Massachusetts! You don’t get elected there by being ‘Temple Worthy’. Salt Lake obviously didn’t control MA when Romney was governor. You’ve seen this play out with George Bush. While there is no governing authority such as the Vatican or Salt Lake City, Bush, in order to govern effectively, cannot wear his evangelical Christianity on his sleeve. That’s just a requirement for office these days in order to govern all the citizens. Romney’s smart enough to know that. I know for a fact because he governed in MA. Besides, our country is a checks and balance system. That’s why I doubt any president would be able to pass legislature or govern influenced by the Vatican, or Salt Lake.

Romney is a Mormon. Romney also is my choice for presidency. He was elected in the most liberal state in the nation and was able to pass his agendas. That ought to tell you about his ability to work across the aisles in a bi-partisan way. When he came into office his state had a 2 billion dollar deficit, jobs were being lost, the education system was awash and people were moving out in record numbers. In four years he was able to not only erase the deficit, but when he left, the state had a 1 billion dollar surplus and he was able to do this without raising any taxes - he did it by eliminating the excess government and beauracracy, much as I believe needs to be done in Washington. While his opponents and the media will attack him for ‘flip-flopping’ on abortion and gay rights, whenever legislation appeared to him over abortion he always came down on the side of life. When the Massachusetts Supreme Court decided to grant citizens the right to homosexual marriage, Romney dissented and did everything in his power to prevent the egregious act. Romney turned around countless buisnesses, a devastated Olympics and the most blue state in the Union with unprecendented success. When the US inexplicable granted the Iranian president Khomeni (Iran is that nation that kinda doesn’t like us, sponsors terrorism you know?) visa, and even invited him to speak at a Harvard graduation ceremony, Romney openly declared that the government would not support a nation that finances terror and refused to grant Khomeni security and other privelidges that most nations representatives get. It’s this kind of mentality that we need to win the war on terror - recognizing the threat and refusing to negotiate. Romney has spoken with countless generals, soldiers and politicians about the Iraq war and the war on terror. He understands what needs to be done. Lastly, Romney has actually governed something unlike most of his counterparts. He is well-spoken, presidential-looking and has won all the GOP debates despite being interupted and attacked by the media. When was the last time the Republicans sat down to a presidential debate believing they had the advantage? Probably Reagan in 1984. Romney is intelligent (double majored at Harvard in Buisness and Law. Graduated at the top of his class), articulate, and well-spoken.

Romney is definitely capable of winning the nomination. He has had great success turning around his state. Our country is in disarray and we need someone outside of Washington to turn around this country, Mormon or not.

Chris Niermann